October 1988 Rajiv Gandhi government bans Satanic Verses on the basis of a book review because it ‘hurts’ Muslim sentiments. Ban still in force. Controversy around the book resurfaces in the run-up to the 2012 Jaipur Literature Festival.

’90s onwards M.F. Husain finds himself the target of Hindutva ire for his “vulgar” paintings of Hindu deities. Several exhibitions of his paintings are attacked. Dies abroad in self-imposed exile after Centre does nothing to ensure his safe return.

November 1996 Violent protests, including by Hindutva activists and feminists, mar the Miss World event in Bangalore.

December 2003 Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute in Pune vandalised by NCP-based Sambhaji Brigade. Reason: ORI helped writer James Laine with translations of old manuscripts for his book Shivaji, Hindu King in Islamic India. Shrikant Bahulkar, a scholar who assisted Laine, is also attacked.

October 2006 Shiv Sena threatens to disrupt cricket matches of ICC tournament if Pakistan is allowed to play in India. In 1991, Sena dug up Wankhede pitch ahead of an Indo-Pak match. Similar vandalism was carried out in 1999 at Delhi's Ferozeshah Kotla.

May 2007 Hindutva activists attack Chandramohan, a student artist at MS University, Baroda, for “vulgar” depiction of gods. Earlier in Jan, Gujarat theatres refuse to screen Parzania, a film on the ’02 pogrom. Aamir’s Fanaa meets similar fate.

August 2007 Bangladesh-born author Taslima Nasreen is repeatedly menaced by Islamists in India for her book Lajja. Attacked by Majlis MLAs in Hyderabad in August 2007. Left Front govt succumbs to Muslim groups, does little to enable her to stay on in West Bengal. Indian government reluctantly renews her visa.

July 2010 Activists of Popular Front of India chop off T.J. Joseph’s hand. This is after the professor in Kerala’s Ernakulam district prepares an exam paper with a question that used the name “Mohammed” for a somewhat daft character.

October 2010 Indian-born Canadian writer Rohinton Mistry's Such a Long Journey dropped by Bombay University after Uddhav Thackeray's son Aditya alleges the book hurt Marathi sentiments by insulting his grandfather, Bal Thackeray.

August 2011 BSP government in Uttar Pradesh bans Aarakshan, Prakash Jha’s film on reservations, after complaints of derogatory references to backward castes.

October 2011 Protests by Sangh parivar among students and faculty prompt Delhi varsity to drop A.K. Ramanujan's essay Three Hundred Ramayanas... from history syllabus.

January 2012 Physically challenged artist Balbir Krishan is assaulted and injured by an assailant at his exhibition of homo-erotic paintings in New Delhi.

***

The situation is as ridiculous as many of the ironies in his celebrated books. But alas, it is not magic realism, but quite the reality, the furore over Salman Rushdie’s proposed visit to India to attend the Jaipur Literature Festival. To some extent, it’s one of those contrived controversies in a season where no other story is competing for eyeballs.

The mullah brigade has made its usual statements about the writer not being allowed to set foot on Indian soil. The TV channels have a great talking point: there are some themes that can always be debated. For 24 years, ever since Satanic Verses invited the wrath of Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran, and was subsequently banned in many countries, including India, Salman Rushdie is always ready material for controversy.

“He does not need a visa. He is a PIO. This is actually a non-issue. It’s a controversy
without logic.”Rakshanda Jalil, Author, Urdu translator

At the time of writing, government and intelligence sources had warned of a dire law-and-order situation if Rushdie came to India, with the Centre putting out stories about banned outfit SIMI hatching a sinister plot against him. Clearly, such stories suggest that the powers-that-be would like the problem to just stay put: in other words, Rushdie should chicken out of travelling to India. Since he possesses a PIO (Person of Indian Origin) card, he doesn’t need a visa. Says Sanjoy Roy, one of the organisers of the Jaipur litfest, “His visit on January 20 stands cancelled. But the invitation to the festival stands.” Well-placed government sources, however, say there is a high possibility of Rushdie attending the festival.

It would be the Ashok Gehlot government’s responsibility to provide security and manage the law-and-order situation if Rushdie arrives in Jaipur. The author had attended the festival in 2007 and there had been no problem. But now that dissent has been manufactured, it has acquired an energy of its own. By now, several clerics, some known, others obscure, have come out with statements. Commentators like Shahid Siddiqui, editor of Nai Duniya and member of the Samajwadi Party, have taken public postures opposing the visit: “He should be allowed here only if he apologises. If he comes, we will exercise our right to protest.”

Since a storm is indeed being stirred in the teacup, protests are certain. The TV cameras will be waiting if Rushdie does descend on India, and TRP ratings will shoot up. A celebrity writer being hounded by obscurantists is just too compelling a story. The story also touches on the issue of blasphemy (always a provocative talking point) and the question of whether the Indian state is genuinely liberal.

“Rushdie is low on moral quotient. As for his coming here as PIO, he has the legal right and most people don’t really care.”Najeeb Jung, V-C, Jamia Millia Islamia

That is indeed debatable. What is not is that the Congress is always nervous when confronted with orthodoxy, and the party has a history of kowtowing to the clerics. Indeed, we can argue that it is the legacy of the Congress that most quasi-government or autonomous Muslim organisations are controlled by individuals either directly from the Deoband seminary or close to it. That has certainly influenced how identity issues of the minority community are articulated and perceived by the larger public.

To his credit, however, Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari says that “there comes a time when people have to stand up for liberalism. I would suggest that the organisers of the festival put Rushdie on video conference if he cannot attend personally”. Fellow spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi reacts to the suggestion that the Centre is planting stories to discourage Rushdie from coming. “It is wrong to say that. It is normal for states to give law-and-order inputs to the Centre. The Centre will weigh the pros and cons and the visit will only be stopped if the law-and-order situation is deemed to be unmanageable.”

The Congress regime in Rajasthan is nervous. There had been a communal conflagration in the Mewat region some months ago when 10 Muslims died, and the party would not want to alienate the community any further. But do ordinary Muslims really care? Ramzan Chaudhary is a lawyer in Gopalgarh village in Mewat, and says that people in the villages are so backward, female literacy among the minorities being as low as five per cent, that they really don’t care about such issues. “If you go to the villages, they will ask who is Rushdie?”

“It’s not an issue for people, it’s a concern for clerics. But if he’s hurt sentiments, he shouldn’t be welcomed.”M.J. Khan, Spokesperson, Peace Party

Even in urban pockets, it is highly unlikely that Rushdie’s comings or goings are a real concern in minority areas. So believes Ali Javed, general secretary of PWA (Progressive Writers Association): “Islam is not such a weak religion that it should be threatened by Rushdie. All these mullahs who go on protesting have not read anything much anyway. They should just be ignored and not given any importance.” Rakshanda Jalil, author and Urdu translator, asks that since Rushdie came and left quietly last time, why is there an issue now? “He does not need a visa. He is a PIO,” she says. “This is actually a non-issue. It’s a controversy without any logic.”

Even those who would have strong words against Rushdie do not see it as a larger issue for the community. Najeeb Jung, vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, has this to say—“Rushdie as an individual is very low on the moral quotient. The Prophet is very special to Muslims and he has never apologised for hurting sentiments. As for his coming to India as a PIO, he has the legal right and I don’t think most people really care about this as a big issue.”

Yet, there is a perception that the New York-based author attending the literary festival could somehow impact the elections in Uttar Pradesh as Muslims would be upset with the Congress for not preventing his visit. M.J. Khan, spokesperson of the Peace Party—which is expected to get a section of the community’s vote—says that the state elections are being fought on local issues and “I don’t think this could become a genuine issue with people”. However, he adds: “It is a concern for the clerics and we believe that if there is a perception that people’s sentiments are hurt, then Rushdie should not be welcomed.”

“There comes a time when we’ve to stand up for liberalism. Put Rushdie on video conference if he can’t attend.”Manish Tewari, Congress spokesperson

If the Congress is uncomfortable about the Rushdie controversy at this stage, it is because in its DNA there is a pathological fear of the clerics. As a party, it mostly ends up appeasing them. The most infamous instance was when the Rajiv Gandhi government passed the Muslim Women’s Bill to overturn the Shahbano judgement. The Congress has never advocated anything progressive in the backward personal laws that still apply to the community. So, at this stage, when the party is trying to win Muslim support in UP, even minor fulminations by clerics spread from Darul Uloom in Deoband, Saharanpur, to Firangi Mahal in Lucknow, would presumably make the local leaders squirm.

There is a larger problem the Rushdie storm highlights. Today, any random group can claim offence or shout blasphemy about a work of art, historical or literary writing. Politicians in general don’t want to offend anyone—they’d rather please everyone. So from Rama Sene and Shiv Sena-type extremists succeeding in sending painter M.F. Husain into exile, where he died last year, to the Ramanujan essay on the Ramayana being dropped from the Delhi University syllabus, the narrow vision triumphs far too often. Showing outrage over a book or art is also a sureshot way to ensure media coverage for a small group of goons or obscurantists. Politics in India can certainly shrink our imaginations. Salman Rushdie has always created a rich imaginary world of fantastic characters, from farishtas to moors to the unforgettable Saleem Sinai of Midnight’s Children. His own journey over time, space and across continents, unfortunately, seems to inhabit a similarly fickle universe.

If you wish your letter to be considered for publication in the print magazine, we request you to use a proper name, with full postal address - you could still maintain your anonymity, but please desist from using unpublishable sobriquets and handles

Apropos of Who’s Afraid of Nobodaddies? (Jan 30), the government’s ambivalence on Rushdie’s visit was unfortunate. Their vacillation over making the choice between upholding the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression and appeasement of a religious community for votes was pathetic and unacceptable. The apex court has made it clear time and again that the likelihood of a law and order problem is no ground to deny freedom of movement to writers and artists in a free country like ours. I, for one, look forward to the display of The Satanic Verses on Indian bookshelves.

Apropos your cover story, Who’s Afraid of Nobodaddies (Jan 30), Muslims may not like Rushdie but are indifferent to his coming or going. Nor do they pay any notice to declarations and fatwas. So why does the media play it up? Political parties too have to stop thinking that the mullahs represent the community. I also cannot understand the need for Outlook to publish an outdated photo of protest against Rushdie. Till you read the caption, it seems like an ongoing protest, like tensions are simmering when there are hardly any. If a long shot of the gathering had been taken, I am sure it would show the presence of just a handful. The media is making a mountain out of a molehill.

Salim, Calcutta

You credit Congress spokesperson Manish Tiwari, no less, with the suggestion of having Rushdie on video conference which, of course, was subsequently not allowed. It seems the Congress continues to suffer from lack of uniformity in thinking and consistency in approach. After the video link too was cancelled at the last minute, that quintessential Congress loose cannon Digvijay Singh, when asked for his comments, supported the cancellation saying religious sentiments of a section of people must be respected (and literary freedom be damned). One recalls the same Singh a few years ago deploring protests against M.F. Husain on grounds of creative freedom.

Sandip K. Pitty, on e-mail

A sensible piece, exposing Congress’s undeclared war on honesty and probity in public life in India.

Tushar Patel, Jamnagar

The issue is not of protests from Deoband. They are entitled to make fools of themselves. This is also not about the few intolerant bigots who take to violent action; they are numerically too inferior. The crime here is that a ruling party has delivered a death threat of sorts to a pio through its state government.

A. Abhi, Mumbai

Blame the government. An issue which could have been handled sensitively was blown out of all proportion and allowed to overshadow a fine literary event.

Shamael Jafri, Lakhimpur Kheri

Where were all the liberal writers when goons attacked M.F. Husain’s shows and drove him out of India? The truth is that India is divided right down the middle and there is really no liberal, non-partisan media or a liberal people as such.

Haruncts, on e-mail

First, they banned the book. Now, they have banned Rushdie under pressure from the votebanks. Election years!

A.K. Ghai, Mumbai

Instead of protesting M.F. Husain’s paintings of naked Hindu goddesses, people could have exercised their own right to artistic freedom and painted him naked (with a drawing board beside him)—like a certain person from Bihar did.

Sangeetha, Chennai

It’s inevitable that votebank politics will turn India into a Saudi Arabia-like Wahabi fundamentalist state, especially when the all-powerful Congress is at the wheel. In today’s India, the so-called communal Saffron Party paradoxically seems the most secular...comparatively, of course.

Narayan, Zurich

Preventing Rushdie’s appearance at the Jaipur Litfest was undoubtedly a shameless attempt by a nervous Congress regime in Rajasthan to appease the ‘mullah brigade’. The party is courting the Muslim vote in a key poll-bound state, by pandering to some dangerous Islamic segments. This unbridled appeasement of radical elements is more dangerous than the threats from Maoism.

K.V. Raghuram, Wayanad

If the government fails to provide proper security to a single PIO, how then can it vouch for the safety of the majority? It is only the cleric-politician axis that plays such dirty games. The average Muslim could not be bothered about protesting Rushdie’s visit.

Somasundaram, Chennai

There is something more than what meets the eye in the entire Rushdie affair. Ironic as it might sound, the presence of someone like Richard Dawkins at the Jaipur fest didn’t raise any eyebrows! Dawkins’s rational criticism of religion, though absolute, is of course different from Rushdie’s ridicule of Islam. But then India hosted someone like Ayaan Hirsi Ali a year back. Her criticism of Prophet Mohammed in explicit terms regarding morality and personality pales Rushdie’s magical-realist exertions. It is not that Rushdie has faced protests every time he has visited India: he has come to the country five times since Khomeini’s fatwa. Blame it on the mini parliamentary elections but the bottomline is that religious fundamentalism in India is increasing. India is on the slow path to becoming a religious state, the theo-democracy of Maulana Maududi. The clash of civilisations with undertones of religious identities and shameless surrender by secular authority will make the democracy in India weaker. In Husain and Rushdie’s penchant for controversy lies the creative freedom of an artist. You cannot call them mere publicity-seekers. The Rushdie controversy started some seven years after he became the first Indian-born writer to win the Booker. He was also the first Indian-born writer to win the Prix du Meilleur Livre four years before the fatwa. Likewise, it took 26 years for Husain’s painting of Hindu goddesses in the nude to stir the fundamentalists; he had already become the Picasso of India and the first Indian national (by birth and right) to win the Golden Bear award.

Anonymous, on e-mail

Can anyone in India stand up and tell all those protesters that gods, saints and prophets of no religion require human intervention to protect them. However, the conduct of the government, at the Centre and in Rajasthan, in this case, was nothing short of shameful.

Navien K. Batta, Muscat

Wondering if the Mullahdom of Qatar will extend Rushdie the same hospitality (grant Qatari nationality, that is) it did to Husain?

Jaleel Khan, Lucknow

Is being deliberately abusive of someone else’s sensibilities really freedom of speech? That said, its compulsions in UP made the Congress capitulate to Muslim protesters, but methinks Rushdie will visit again, after the elections, and the Congress will welcome him with open arms, in the name of freedom of expression!

Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.

1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.

2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.

To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.

Thanks and Regards,
Tony Joseph

76/D-112

Jan 27, 2012

04:47 PM

Clearly, the author is comparing apples with oranges. While Salman Rushdie has made it amply clear that he has no particular fondness for any religion, MF Hussain was a different case altogether. While he refused to apologize for painting Hindu gods nude, he readily withdrew a song from his film (I forget the name of the film) that Muslim groups found objectionable. So much for art and freedom of expression! Having said that, the ruckus that Shiv Sena and other Hindu groups created over his nude paintings was a classic case of shooting oneself in the foot. It gave Hussain's mediocre paintings free publicity and exposed the stupidity of these Hindu groups. After all, Hinduism and the glorious traditions of tolerance and openness it represents isn't and cannot be demeaned by a few paintings, but can be injured by its own adherents' idiocy, as in this case.

The issue is not about right or wrong.. The issue cannot be about daring or non daring leaders.. The issue can't be about freedom of speech.. The issue cannot be about politics...

The issue is ABOUT GOVERNANCE RELATED TO LAW AND ORDER..

There is NO INDIA.. Repeat there is NO INDIA.. It needs to be formed.. Just like minded people are staying next to each other.. Just look at it this way ...

1) There is no other country which GOVERNS ITSELF IN A LANGUAGE WHICH IT DOES NOT UNDERSTAND.(ENGLISH).. Imagine you going to Russia and asking justice if the Russian police arrest you in Russia and imagine the trials in that language. You will be very much afraid... Now imagine in India an illeterate from a village comes to a near by CITY AND HE TRIES to get justice in ENGLISH... Especially in the High/Supreme Court.. R U kidding.. Can anybody provide justice in a foreign language ? Will the illeterate understnd the justice

2) The job of a policeman is to arrest a so called trouble maker who does vandalism.. Then he takes the suspect into the COURT OF LAW.. Then the judge has to analyze and then prosecute the suspect accordingly...

3) Does that ever happen to hooligan who belongs to a political party.

4) Now imagine the Police commissioner is supposed to represent a city. But many times he is an appointed person by the politician. In foreign countries Police Commissioners are elected by city local people..

5) Lastly imagine if a Police commissioner and the judge in India started implementing the constiution.. THE MASS PEOPLE WILL NOT LIKE IT. THEY WILL GO NUTS. Cos most people in India DO NOT UNDERSTAND LAWS NOR DO THEY OBEY THEM. THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT IMPLEMENT THEM. WHY BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT WRITTEN WITH THE PEOPLE INTO CONFIDENCE WHICH HAPPENS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

A country where there is no governance guess what the Police institution now has become A GUDA RAJ OF THE MAFIA. THE POLITICIANS HAVE BECOMED THE MAFIA. In India laws are used to threaten and extract money NOT TO PROVIDE JUSTICE...

To do the right thing sometimes requires stepping in the troubled waters. Nothing is gained by waiting at the shore.

We banned the book in '88. Some say Babri Masjid was a logical fallout of submitting to the same elements. Look where it got us.

No one, and I mean no one is so holy that he/she cannot be criticized. To our brethren who lose no opportunity in calling him a coward: Prophet did scoot from Mecca when it got too hot. And, security didn't protect Kennedy. You may hate him but Rushdie is a brave soul.

B. Rao,

While the story behing linga puja is quite fantastic, Shiva purana was written much later. Linga worship follows an ancient tradition and it's quite wonderful that it has survived till now.

We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism

But:

1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.

2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads

3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site

4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.

5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT

6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.

7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.

8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.

9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:

a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you